FERNANDEZ
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A habeas corpus petition raising issues that could have been or were raised on direct appeal is unauthorized and subject to dismissal.
[1] A petition for a writ of habeas corpus is unauthorized when the issues raised could have been or were raised on direct appeal.
[2] A prisoner found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal is subject to disciplinary procedures by the Department of…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Because the issues Fernandez raises in his petition could have been or were raised on direct appeal, we dismiss his petition as unauthorized.”
The court's primary basis for dismissal of the habeas petition
Louis D. Fernandez, a pro se petitioner, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking to vacate his conviction. The issues raised in his petitio…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Frivolous Filings cases and more on FLexlaw
March 13, 2024 PER CURIAM. Louis D. Fernandez petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking to vacate his conviction. Because the issues Fernandez raises in his petition could have been or were raised on direct appeal, we dismiss his petition as unauthorized. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236, 1245-46 (Fla. 2004).
We also find that this petition is frivolous. We direct the Clerk of the Court to provide a certified copy of this opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections to be forwarded to the appropriate institution or facility for disciplinary procedures under the rules of the Department. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (providing that “[a] prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal . . . or to have brought a frivolous or malicious collateral criminal proceeding . . . is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections”).
Fernandez is warned that any future filings that this court determines to be frivolous may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a prohibition against further pro se filings in this court. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999) (“[A]ny citizen, including a citizen attacking his or her conviction, abuses the right to pro se access by filing repetitious and frivolous pleadings, thereby diminishing the ability of the courts to devote their finite resources to the consideration of legitimate claims.”). DISMISSED. B.L. THOMAS, ROBERTS, and ROWE, JJ., concur.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)